Posted by crzymdups:



seriously dude, you are grasping at straws. hughes is a quality guard and it was worth a look to see if he fit in this system. he didn't, but it wasn't a huge loss on any front.

not to mention that if Isiah made that trade he would have thrown in a draft pick for Chicago.

larry hughes a quality guard? talk about grasping at straws

http://heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com/

Posted by TMS:

did u just say we'd be killing Isiah for not getting a pick for Big Turd, Fugazy & Robersuck? are u kidding me?

no we'd be killing IT for helping clear Chi's guard glut by taking on a cancer like Hughes which also saved the Chicago owner some money in the process.

Timmy helped the Knicks alot more tha Hughes did, so much that they are considering a 3rd tour. Roberson and James effect nothing. Don't know why you keep mentioning them.

Posted by McK1:

Posted by TMS:

did u just say we'd be killing Isiah for not getting a pick for Big Turd, Fugazy & Robersuck? are u kidding me?

no we'd be killing IT for helping clear Chi's guard glut by taking on a cancer like Hughes which also saved the Chicago owner some money in the process.

Timmy helped the Knicks alot more tha Hughes did, so much that they are considering a 3rd tour. Roberson and James effect nothing. Don't know why you keep mentioning them.

dude, seriously speak for urself cuz i for one would have had the same exact reaction to that trade if Isiah made it or Donnie made it... it didn't hurt our cap & it was worth a try... we weren't getting anything of use for those guys anyway... to complain that we didn't get back more than Larry Hughes in that deal is ridiculous.

at the time, many knicks fans thought dumping zach and crawford for expirings were a great move by walsh and that not any gm could've done that. he was able to move long term deals for basically nothing but cap space. d'antoni was able to pump up their stats enough to make them desireable. at the time of the deals, the knicks were 6-5.

from that point on, zach went to la la land and played like he always does. the team played like crap. crawford went to golden state and then quickly got benched and told he wasn't going to play and be dealt.

this offseason, both zach and crawford were dealt again for expiring deals.

so...where am i going? with the knicks having a 6-5 record, and both zach AND crawford playing well, it's not unreasonable to assume the knicks would be in the playoff hunt the rest of the way.

so two things could have happened last season if walsh wasn't so knee jerk (ala isiah), knicks could've made the postseason. what does that achieve? gets their fans pumped and probably inflates the value of the franchise in the eyes of other players. also, moving zach and crawford may have actually yielded not only expiring deals but also something of value in return. or they coudl've played the same and still could've dumped both for expirings.

yes it's hindsight, but i'm not paid $3 mil a year to not deal with hindsight but deal with the franchise and progressively thinking about it. walsh was no more knee jerk that isiah in making those deals.

i understand knicks fans are always looking for the best, and it's human nature to defend something you want to believe in. but you don't have to. there's no need to go balls to the wall for walsh b/c he hasn't done anything tangible yet. this season is basically just another wasted season for the knicks. nothing really to look forward to other than hoping gallo can play a full season.

i disagree with bitty when she says if the team doesn't win, it's not a success. my view on success is a gm that's willing to put a team together that he feels CAN win. wizards are an example...some players are hurt, roster is not perfect but you can't blame him for not putting a talented team on the floor that could win alot of games if they stay healthy. these past two seasons, any attempt to win has been thrown out the window by walsh & co. that's why i don't get the full support he's getting. he sold the fans on a *savior* in 2010. so i guess y'all have to wait till then...but since i've moved on and can look at this team w/o any attachments, i don't agree with it. when you see dumars & colangelo not waiting for 2010 and actually take advantage of the current economic situation, it kind of makes you re-think this team's strategy.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-20-2009 6:14 PM]

Posted by djsunyc:

at the time, many knicks fans thought dumping zach and crawford for expirings were a great move by walsh and that not any gm could've done that. he was able to move long term deals for basically nothing but cap space. d'antoni was able to pump up their stats enough to make them desireable. at the time of the deals, the knicks were 6-5.

from that point on, zach went to la la land and played like he always does. the team played like crap. crawford went to golden state and then quickly got benched and told he wasn't going to play and be dealt.

this offseason, both zach and crawford were dealt again for expiring deals.

so...where am i going? with the knicks having a 6-5 record, and both zach AND crawford playing well, it's not unreasonable to assume the knicks would be in the playoff hunt the rest of the way.

so two things could have happened last season if walsh wasn't so knee jerk (ala isiah), knicks could've made the postseason. what does that achieve? gets their fans pumped and probably inflates the value of the franchise in the eyes of other players. also, moving zach and crawford may have actually yielded not only expiring deals but also something of value in return. or they coudl've played the same and still could've dumped both for expirings.

yes it's hindsight, but i'm not paid $3 mil a year to not deal with hindsight but deal with the franchise and progressively thinking about it. walsh was no more knee jerk that isiah in making those deals.

i understand knicks fans are always looking for the best, and it's human nature to defend something you want to believe in. but you don't have to. there's no need to go balls to the wall for walsh b/c he hasn't done anything tangible yet. this season is basically just another wasted season for the knicks. nothing really to look forward to other than hoping gallo can play a full season.

i disagree with bitty when she says if the team doesn't win, it's not a success. my view on success is a gm that's willing to put a team together that he feels CAN win. wizards are an example...some players are hurt, roster is not perfect but you can't blame him for not putting a talented team on the floor that could win alot of games if they stay healthy. these past two seasons, any attempt to win has been thrown out the window by walsh & co. that's why i don't get the full support he's getting. he sold the fans on a *savior* in 2010. so i guess y'all have to wait till then...but since i've moved on and can look at this team w/o any attachments, i don't agree with it. when you see dumars & colangelo not waiting for 2010 and actually take advantage of the current economic situation, it kind of makes you re-think this team's strategy.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-20-2009 6:14 PM]

Shooooda, Wooooda, Cooodaaaa...
Walsh and are not into 2010 plan. Don't be delusional.
This kind of things never worked and will never work.
This team will start getting better in 2011 and no earlier.
Any professional in NBA knows this. All the rest propaganda for the fans.

Posted by djsunyc:

at the time, many knicks fans thought dumping zach and crawford for expirings were a great move by walsh and that not any gm could've done that. he was able to move long term deals for basically nothing but cap space. d'antoni was able to pump up their stats enough to make them desireable. at the time of the deals, the knicks were 6-5.

from that point on, zach went to la la land and played like he always does. the team played like crap. crawford went to golden state and then quickly got benched and told he wasn't going to play and be dealt.

this offseason, both zach and crawford were dealt again for expiring deals.

so...where am i going? with the knicks having a 6-5 record, and both zach AND crawford playing well, it's not unreasonable to assume the knicks would be in the playoff hunt the rest of the way.

so two things could have happened last season if walsh wasn't so knee jerk (ala isiah), knicks could've made the postseason. what does that achieve? gets their fans pumped and probably inflates the value of the franchise in the eyes of other players. also, moving zach and crawford may have actually yielded not only expiring deals but also something of value in return. or they coudl've played the same and still could've dumped both for expirings.

yes it's hindsight, but i'm not paid $3 mil a year to not deal with hindsight but deal with the franchise and progressively thinking about it. walsh was no more knee jerk that isiah in making those deals.

i understand knicks fans are always looking for the best, and it's human nature to defend something you want to believe in. but you don't have to. there's no need to go balls to the wall for walsh b/c he hasn't done anything tangible yet. this season is basically just another wasted season for the knicks. nothing really to look forward to other than hoping gallo can play a full season.

i disagree with bitty when she says if the team doesn't win, it's not a success. my view on success is a gm that's willing to put a team together that he feels CAN win. wizards are an example...some players are hurt, roster is not perfect but you can't blame him for not putting a talented team on the floor that could win alot of games if they stay healthy. these past two seasons, any attempt to win has been thrown out the window by walsh & co. that's why i don't get the full support he's getting. he sold the fans on a *savior* in 2010. so i guess y'all have to wait till then...but since i've moved on and can look at this team w/o any attachments, i don't agree with it. when you see dumars & colangelo not waiting for 2010 and actually take advantage of the current economic situation, it kind of makes you re-think this team's strategy.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-20-2009 6:14 PM]

I'm trying to understand something here. After all we went through, you are really trying to pass off the argument that we would be a playoff team with Isiah's roster? Really? I think this is more unbelievable than what you consider "ball to the wall" for Walsh. When we were 6-5 we had just lost 2 in a row in typical Knicks fashion. The team was well on their way to sucking again, as they've proven before. Please don't try and make this out to be something it really isn't, especially after 11 games in a season. Extremely small sample size. Knicks would have not made the playoffs with Isiah's team and none of the guys they traded would have brought back more than they acquired in a trade. Walsh is the opposite of Isiah so I'm not sure where you are going with this. Knee jerk? He waited an entire offseason and the start of the season to trade 2 guys that needed to be traded to create cap room. He didn't find a deal that he liked (clippers were asking for a pick to take Randolph at the time) and waited it out until the Clipps became desperate and Al wanted out. Dumars had a solid team in place already and he added to it with 2 free agent signings. Colangelo has a franchise player on his team to build around and he's trying to keep him. I don't get the comparisons at all.

I don't defend anything because I want to believe in it. I have insulted Isiah since 2005, way before anyone thought he was doing a bad job and when Larry Brown was the one being crappy on by every Knick fan fooled by the Isiah smile. If this season is another wasted season, so be it. At least this "wasted season" will have a light at the end of the tunnel instead of the previous 9 wasted seasons that had us feature a capped out, mostly veteran craptacular team with no hope of going anywhere. And even if that light isn't in 2010, it doesn't matter. We are better off now than we were last year and will be better off in 2010 and 2011 than where we were then and now. Why? Our picks will return to us, Jeffries and Curry will be expiring, we will have cap space to work with and hopefully we will have one guy (Gallinari) to look forward to. When is the last time you could say that about the Knicks? When is the last time they had cap space or a true young player with star potential? It's been that long.

clips first offered a 2nd rder for Zach...the same deal they offered to the Nuggets for Camby.

[Edited by - McK1 on 07-20-2009 6:32 PM]

Posted by djsunyc:

at the time, many knicks fans thought dumping zach and crawford for expirings were a great move by walsh and that not any gm could've done that. he was able to move long term deals for basically nothing but cap space. d'antoni was able to pump up their stats enough to make them desireable. at the time of the deals, the knicks were 6-5.

from that point on, zach went to la la land and played like he always does. the team played like crap. crawford went to golden state and then quickly got benched and told he wasn't going to play and be dealt.

this offseason, both zach and crawford were dealt again for expiring deals.

so...where am i going? with the knicks having a 6-5 record, and both zach AND crawford playing well, it's not unreasonable to assume the knicks would be in the playoff hunt the rest of the way.

so two things could have happened last season if walsh wasn't so knee jerk (ala isiah), knicks could've made the postseason. what does that achieve? gets their fans pumped and probably inflates the value of the franchise in the eyes of other players. also, moving zach and crawford may have actually yielded not only expiring deals but also something of value in return. or they coudl've played the same and still could've dumped both for expirings.

yes it's hindsight, but i'm not paid $3 mil a year to not deal with hindsight but deal with the franchise and progressively thinking about it. walsh was no more knee jerk that isiah in making those deals.

i understand knicks fans are always looking for the best, and it's human nature to defend something you want to believe in. but you don't have to. there's no need to go balls to the wall for walsh b/c he hasn't done anything tangible yet. this season is basically just another wasted season for the knicks. nothing really to look forward to other than hoping gallo can play a full season.

i disagree with bitty when she says if the team doesn't win, it's not a success. my view on success is a gm that's willing to put a team together that he feels CAN win. wizards are an example...some players are hurt, roster is not perfect but you can't blame him for not putting a talented team on the floor that could win alot of games if they stay healthy. these past two seasons, any attempt to win has been thrown out the window by walsh & co. that's why i don't get the full support he's getting. he sold the fans on a *savior* in 2010. so i guess y'all have to wait till then...but since i've moved on and can look at this team w/o any attachments, i don't agree with it. when you see dumars & colangelo not waiting for 2010 and actually take advantage of the current economic situation, it kind of makes you re-think this team's strategy.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 07-20-2009 6:14 PM]

6-5 is too small a sample to reach any judgment on. 30 win Knick teams have had 6-0 stretches. That was the same roster that missed the playoffs the prior season.

it was a different team

3 new starters and Steph was finally healthy